There are some that seem to think he could get the franchise tag AND the Iggs keep him.

Am I missing something here? 25 mil for a backup QB in an off season where they have very little money?

Greenstealth

02-20-2019 01:45 PM

I watched a former gm say foles was worth two firsts after the sb...

Ground_Meat

02-20-2019 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greenstealth
(Post 1928293)

I watched a former gm say foles was worth two firsts after the sb...

Right, that’s if they trade him. Surely Howie is wise enough to make sure he’s got a suitor before applying the tag, no?

Greenstealth

02-20-2019 02:20 PM

I've had this same discussion at length on here. If I were a suitor why would I give up draft capital to get him? To avoid a bidding war? I don't see it. I could be wrong but I think they'd have to be under the cap with enough room to put the tag in place so they'd need to free up cash. Tagging a player just to trade wasnt supposed to be allowed (although the pats did it with Cassell) ...and now I just read that apparently tagging and trading is ok (per schefter). To top all of that off whatever the potential suitor would be giving up would have to be better than the comp pick they'd be getting. So no, I don't see them tagging foles and keeping him.

Ground_Meat

02-20-2019 02:51 PM

I agree with your assessment, but why go through all this...knowing full-well that he’d pay $2 mil to opt out?

bobbyuk

02-20-2019 03:02 PM

The only way I would see this happening is if they decided to do the unthinkable—keep Foles, negotiate a multi year contract with him and trade Wentz to the highest bidder. Foles is proven in this offense—took the organisation on 3 playoff runs under 2 different coaches in Philly. And maybe all of that noise about Wentz has them rethinking things.

06hawkalum

02-20-2019 03:10 PM

Damn it...I misread the thread title as "Talking Heads Reunion" and got excited.

That would be sick!

Mr. Triple Dip

02-20-2019 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbyuk
(Post 1928301)

The only way I would see this happening is if they decided to do the unthinkable—keep Foles, negotiate a multi year contract with him and trade Wentz to the highest bidder. Foles is proven in this offense—took the organisation on 3 playoff runs under 2 different coaches in Philly. And maybe all of that noise about Wentz has them rethinking things.

Maybe a mix? Tag and keep Foles - he'd be an expensive backup but they've always said they want to invest heavy in the QB position.

Evaluate Wentz in 2019 JUST to make sure hes the guy. If Wentz does enough to prove that then they do the Foles song and dance next offseason and chalk up the 25 million as very expensive insurance they didn't need. If Wentz does not return to form they can consider the unthinkable scenario you've mentioned of keeping Foles and moving on from Wentz.

Ground_Meat

02-20-2019 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Triple Dip
(Post 1928305)

Maybe a mix? Tag and keep Foles - he'd be an expensive backup but they've always said they want to invest heavy in the QB position.

Evaluate Wentz in 2019 JUST to make sure hes the guy. If Wentz does enough to prove that then they do the Foles song and dance next offseason and chalk up the 25 million as very expensive insurance they didn't need. If Wentz does not return to form they can consider the unthinkable scenario you've mentioned of keeping Foles and moving on from Wentz.

This is exactly my original point. They don’t have the luxury of having tons of cap space for this kind of play.

art vandelay

02-20-2019 04:20 PM

Tagging and keeping Foles seems like the one thing that can't and won't happen. If they really want to keep Foles, I think they'd be better off just offering him a contract.

thegodfather

02-20-2019 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ground_Meat
(Post 1928292)

There are some that seem to think he could get the franchise tag AND the Iggs keep him.

Am I missing something here? 25 mil for a backup QB in an off season where they have very little money?

IF they franchise him that means they have a deal in place with someone. They will not franchise him unless they do. I am sure Nick, the Eagles and Jags have talked and if all are in for him going there then this keeps them from getting into a pissing match with another team and gets the Eagles a pick whatever it may be. I would think its a 2 or 3.

Drama Queen

02-20-2019 04:43 PM

Everyone is making this to complicated.

The Eagles can tag Foles and keep him. They’ll just need to restructure or terminate other contracts to get under the salary cap by 3/15/19.

The Eagles aren’t going to bluff. Other teams have been informed knowing the Eagles intention to keep Foles as opposed to just letting him walk.

If teams want Foles, they’ll need to trade for him. It’s that simple.

The PTF article last month suggested that Foles fight the Eagles if they tag and trade. Here is th the CBA language:
“Article 4, Section 8, subsection (b) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement states as follows: “A Club extending a Required Tender must, for so long as that Tender is extended, have a good faith intention to employ the player receiving the Tender at the Tender compensation level during the upcoming season.”

Does anyone really think Foles is going to challenge the Eagles good faith intention of keeping him? Foles will simply agree to a trade knowing he was able to choose the team he wanted to go to. How in the hell will anyone prove that the Eagles didn’t have a good faith intention of keeping Foles, especially if they restructure contracts and keep him beyond the 3/1519 deadline. The Eagles have always been consistent by place the highest regard on the QB group since Peterson has been a coach. So good luck to anyone who challenges them.

With all of this in mind, will a trade take place? I’ve been very consistent in suggesting that the Eagles, Foles and another team have already found a mutual interest in doing so.

I’ve also explained why the Eagles were going to tag Foles and why he would decline, and why the franchise tag will come, and why a trade is close to certain.

We can talk about it some more though. It’s an unusual situation

Greenstealth

02-20-2019 04:45 PM

Lol

Ground_Meat

02-20-2019 04:46 PM

You are absolutely correct that they can get under the salary and probably make this work. In doing so, they will cut vital pieces of this team and strap themselves for signing anyone else. How does this make sense?

Greenstealth

02-20-2019 04:48 PM

"everyone is making this to complicated" and make that post

Greenstealth

02-20-2019 04:54 PM

Because that 2m

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ground_Meat
(Post 1928299)

I agree with your assessment, but why go through all this...knowing full-well that he’d pay $2 mil to opt out?

Goes back on their books.

Drama Queen

02-20-2019 05:07 PM

You’re struggling.

I gave you all the information you needed in the early part of Feb. and yet here you are, miffed as ever.

Drama Queen

02-20-2019 05:15 PM

Restructuring isn’t getting rid of guys. Not resigning guys like Howie Long until things are rapped up with Foles isn’t hard.

I’m not going to pretend to think that the Eagles don’t really know what they’re going to do with most of the guys on the roster... like Peters ...

Edit to add: to answer your question more specifically. Keeping Foles in the roster is not ideal as far as adding other pieces to the roster, but they are prepared to accept that worse case senerio. I imagine it goes something like this. Plan A tag and trade Foles before the dead 3/13 deadline. Plan B: Keep Foles after the deadline put have all your ducks in place with other players agents and whatnot to restructure. Then, continue to work on trading him.

Again, the Eagles let parties know ahead of time what they are willing to do. Deal or no deal.

art vandelay

02-20-2019 06:21 PM

The Pats tagged and traded Cassell under a different CBA that possibly had no provision for that. In any case, tagging and trading Foles would only be a problem if Foles decided to file a grievance. And he doesn't seem inclined to do that.

Drama Queen

02-20-2019 06:29 PM

Right, but it’s possible that Foles will still be property of the Eagles after 3/15. It’s certainly not ideal.